(a) Claims for Relief. A pleading which sets forththat states a
claim for relief,-- whether
an original claim, a counterclaim, cross-claima crossclaim, or
a third-party claim,-- must
contain:

(i)(1) a short and plain statement of the claim showing
that the pleader is entitled to relief,;
and

(ii)(2) a demand for judgment for the relief
the pleader seeks. Reliefsought, which may
include relief in the alternative or of several different types may be
demandedof relief.

(b) Defenses-Form ofand Denials.

(1) In General. In responding to a pleading, a party must:

A party shall(A) state in short and plain terms
the party'sits defenses to each claim asserted
against it; and

shall(B) admit or deny the averments upon which the
adverse party reliesallegations
asserted against it by an opposing party.

(2) Denials -- Responding to the Substance. A denialIf a party is without
knowledge or
information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of an averment, the party shall so state
and this has the effect of a denial. Denials must fairly meetrespond to the substance of the
averments deniedallegation.

(3) General and Specific Denials. A party that intends in good faith to deny all the
allegations of a pleading may do so by a general denial. A party that does not intend to deny
all the allegations must either specifically deny designated allegations or generally deny all
except those specifically admitted.

(4) Denying Part of an Allegation.If a pleaderA party
that intends in good faith to deny
only a part or a qualification of an averment, the pleader shall specify
so much of it asof an
allegation must admit the part that is true and material and shall deny
only the remainderrest.
Unless the pleader intends in good faith to controvert all the averments of the preceding
pleading, the pleader may make denials as specific denials of designated averments or
paragraphs, or may generally deny all the averments except such designated averments or
paragraphs as the pleader expressly admits; but, if the pleader does so intend to controvert
all its averments, the pleader may do so by general denial, subject to the obligations set forth
in Rule 11.

(5) Lacking Knowledge or Information. A party that lacks knowledge or information
sufficient to form a belief about the truth of an allegation must so state, and the statement
has the effect of a denial.

(6) Effect of Failing to Deny. An allegation -- other than one relating to the amount of
damages -- is admitted if a responsive pleading is required and the allegation is not denied.
If a responsive pleading is not required, an allegation is considered denied or avoided.

(c) Affirmative Defenses. In pleadingresponding to a
preceding pleading, a party shall set
forthmust affirmatively state any avoidance or affirmative defense,
including:

-- accord and satisfaction,:

-- arbitration and award,:

-- assumption of risk,:

-- contributory negligence,:

-- discharge in bankruptcy,:

-- duress,:

-- estoppel,:

-- failure of consideration,:

-- fraud,:

-- illegality,:

-- injury by fellow servant,:

-- laches,:

-- license,:

-- payment,:

-- release,:

-- res judicata,:

-- statute of frauds,:

-- statute of limitations,: and

-- waiver,.

and any other matter constituting an avoidance or affirmative defense.

(2) Mistaken Designation.WhenIf a party
has mistakenly designateddesignates a defense
as a counterclaim, or a counterclaim as a defense, the court on termsmust, if justice so
requires, shall treat the pleading as if there had been a proper
designationthough it were
correctly designated, and may impose terms for doing so.

(d) Effect of failure to deny. Averments in a pleading to which a responsive
pleading is
required, other than those as to the amount of damage, are admitted when not denied in the
responsive pleading. Averments in a pleading to which no responsive pleading is required
or permitted shall be taken as denied or avoided.[Transferred to Rule 8(b)(6)]

(e) Pleading to be Concise and Direct-Consistency; Alternative
Statements; Inconsistency.

(1) In General. Each averment of a pleadingallegation
must be simple, concise, and direct.
No technical forms of pleading or motions areform is required.

(2) Alternative Statements of a Claim or Defense. A party may set
forthout two or more
statements of a claim or defense alternatively or hypothetically, either in onea single count
or defense or in separate counts or defensesones. If a party
makestwo or more statements
are made in the alternative statements,and one of them if made
independently would be
sufficient, the pleading is not made insufficient by the insufficiency of one or
more of the
alternative statementssufficient if any one of them is sufficient.

(3) Inconsistent Claims of Defenses. A party may also state as
many separate claims or
defenses as the partyit has, regardless of consistency and
whether based on legal or on
equitable grounds or on both. All statements made are subject to the obligations set forth in
Rule 11.

(f) Construction ofConstruing Pleadings. All pleadings
shallPleadings must be so
construed so as to do substantial justice.

EXPLANATORY NOTE

Rule 8 was amended, effective March 1, 1990; _____________.

This rule is identical to Rulebased on Fed.R.Civ.P. 8,
FRCivP, except for the deletion of
references to a showing of grounds for jurisdiction in subdivisions (a) and (b) and maritime
grounds in subdivision (d)(2).

Rule 8 was amended, effective _______________, in response to the December 1,
2007,
revision of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The language and organization of the rule
were changed to make the rule more easily understood and to make style and terminology
consistent throughout the rules.

Subdivisions (a), (b), and (e) were amended, effective March 1, 1990. The amendments are
technical in nature and no substantive change is intended.

Previous to the adoption of N.D.R.Civ.P., a complaint or counterclaim was
required to
allege the pleader's "cause of action." N.D.R.C. 1943 § 28-0702. Because of
considerable confusion among the courts as to what constituted a "cause of action," Rule 8
was cast in language designed to finesse the confusion as well as to simplify the pleader's
task.

Wright and Miller put it this way:

"The substitution of 'claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief' for code
formulation of the 'facts' constituting a 'cause of action' was intended to avoid the
distinctions drawn under the codes among 'evidentiary facts,' 'ultimate facts,' and
'conclusions' and eliminate the unfortunate rigidity and confusion surrounding the words
'cause of action' that had developed under the codes. The draftsmen of the federal rules
obviously felt that the use of a new formulation would emphasize the modern philosophy
of procedure espoused by the federal rules, destroy the viability of the old code precedents,
and encourage a more flexible approach by the courts in defining the concept of claim for
relief." Wright and Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure: Civil § 1216.

The leading case of Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 78 S. Ct. 99, 2 L. Ed. 2d 80
(1957),
makes clear that a complaint is sufficient if plaintiff would be entitled to relief under any
state of facts that could be proven in support of the claim alleged.

While the pleading of "facts" constituting a "cause of action" may suffice as a
statement of
a "claim for relief" under this rule, the pleader runs the risk of pleading more than "a short
and plain statement of the claim" as well as pleading "evidentiary facts" and "conclusions."
These matters are subject to a motion to strike under Rule 12(f). See, 4 Cyclopedia of
Federal Procedure (3d ed.) § 14.157.

For historical background of the development of Rule 8, see R. W. Miller, Civil
Procedure
of the Trial Court in Historical Perspective (1952), Chapters VI, VII and XIII.